March 18, 2022

Evidence on the effectiveness and safety of

ultraviolet germicidal irradiation technologies in
reducing SARS-CoV-2 in the air of occupied
rooms
March 2022

Table of contents
Introduction....................................................................................................................................................................... 2
Key points .......................................................................................................................................................................... 2
Overview of the evidence............................................................................................................................................. 4
What is the effectiveness of UV-C lamps used for whole-room far UV-C to reduce SARS-CoV-2
in the air of occupied rooms? ................................................................................................................................ 5
What is the effectiveness of UV-C lamps used for upper-room UVGI to reduce SARS-CoV-2 in
the air of occupied rooms? ..................................................................................................................................... 5
What is the effectiveness of portable UV air cleaners to reduce SARS-CoV-2 in the air of
occupied rooms? ........................................................................................................................................................ 6
What is the safety of UVGI technologies to inactivate SARS-CoV-2 in the air of occupied
rooms? ............................................................................................................................................................................ 7
Methods.............................................................................................................................................................................. 7
Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................................... 8
Evidence tables ................................................................................................................................................................ 8
Table 1: Evidence on the effectiveness of UV-C lamps for whole-room far UV-C in inactivating
SARS-CoV-2 in the air of occupied rooms (n=1) ........................................................................................... 8
Table 2: Evidence on the effectiveness of UV-C lamps used for upper-room UVGI in
inactivating SARS-CoV-2 in the air of occupied rooms (n=7) ................................................................... 9
Table 3: Evidence on the effectiveness of portable UV air cleaners in inactivating SARS-CoV-2
in the air of occupied rooms (n=1) ................................................................................................................... 14
Table 4: Evidence on the safety of UV-C technologies in inactivating SARS-CoV-2 in the air of
occupied rooms (n=2) ........................................................................................................................................... 15
References....................................................................................................................................................................... 18

PHAC EMERGING SCIENCE SUMMARIES 1

COVID-19 Summary of UVGI technologies in reducing SARS-CoV-2 March 18, 2022

Introduction
What is the effectiveness and safety of UVGI technologies in reducing SARS-CoV-2 in the
air of occupied rooms?

Ultraviolet germicidal irradiation (UVGI) is a method of disinfection that uses ultraviolet-C (UV-C)
radiation (200-280nm) to inactivate microorganisms and pathogens on surfaces, in air, and in
water. UV-C has demonstrated the ability to effectively and safely inactivate the SARS-CoV-2
virus up to 99.9% 1. UVGI technologies that use UV-C, commonly at a peak wavelength of
254 nm, have been used to disinfect indoor spaces such as hospitals and clinical settings for
years, but are generally used when there are no people present as UV-C wavelengths >230nm
can have negative effects on human tissue directly exposed to the UV-C 2. Some of these effects
include phototoxicity (skin irritations) and photokeratitis (eye irritations) 3.

There are four methods to disinfect the air with UVGI technologies: 1) irradiating the upper-
room air only (upper-room UVGI), 2) irradiating the full room, whole-room far UV-C when rooms
are occupied, 3) UVGI placed in portable air cleaners, and 4) irradiating air as it passes through
enclosed spaces which commonly include in-duct UVGI placed in heating, ventilation, and air-
conditioning (HVAC) systems. The latter is excluded from this review as there is no evidence that
SARS-CoV-2 has been transmitted through ventilation systems. This review will focus on
evidence for the application of the first three methods when rooms are occupied. Of these
methods, upper-room UVGI has been used for more than 70 years to reduce transmission of
pathogens such as tuberculosis (TB) 4.

The studies in this review cover various UVGI technologies that can be used in rooms with
people present, including UV-C lamps that are wall-mounted, UV-C ceiling fans, and portable
UV-C air cleaners. This evidence brief summarizes the literature regarding the safety and
effectiveness of UVGI technologies in reducing SARS-CoV-2 in the air of occupied rooms up to
March 18, 2022.

Key points
Nine studies were included, nine reporting on the effectiveness (Table 1-3) and two reporting on
the safety (Table 4) of UVGI technologies to reduce SARS-CoV-2 in the air of occupied rooms.
The evidence was from simulation (n=8) and observational (n=1) studies and overall the level of
evidence in this review is considered low.

PHAC EMERGING SCIENCE SUMMARIES 2

COVID-19 Summary of UVGI technologies in reducing SARS-CoV-2 March 18, 2022

Effectiveness

Nine studies were in agreement that UVGI technologies can be effective in reducing SARS-CoV-
2 in the air of occupied rooms. The technologies investigated included whole-room UVGI using
far UV-C (n=1), upper-room UVGI (n=7), and portable UV air cleaners (n=1).

One study investigated the effectiveness of a new UVGI technology using a far UV-C lamp.
 A whole room UV simulation demonstrated a far UV-C lamp (207-222nm) could further
reduce SARS-CoV-2 by 50-85% compared to ventilation alone and with both far UV-C
and high ventilation the SARS-CoV-2 viral count was reduced by 90% in 6 minutes and
99% in 11.5 minutes 5.
The upper-room UVGI technologies investigated included wall-mounted UV-C lamps (n=6) and
UV-C ceiling fans (n=1). Both the wall mounted and ceiling fan fixtures have disinfecting UV-C
lamps that aim up at the ceiling. These technologies were effective in reducing SARS-CoV-2 in
the air of occupied rooms in both observational (n=1) and simulation (n=6) studies.

 A Russian hospital reported only community acquired COVID-19 cases among staff April
to June 2020 and no transmission among patients to staff in hospital rooms with wall-
mounted upper room UVGI fixtures (low-pressure mercury lamps, 254nm) 6.
 When the UV-C susceptibility constant for SARS-CoV-2 is 0.038 m2/J, SARS-CoV-2
disinfection rates >90% can effectively occur in a 2.5m high room with ventilation rates
between 1-6 air changes per hour (ACH), and one UV lamp (30 W) located every 18.6 m2
(average fluence rate = 50 µW/cm2), where fluence is a measure of UV dose and is
defined as the total radiant energy on an infinitesimal sphere 7.
 A dose response relationship was demonstrated where a UV-C lamp (254nm) with a
power of 55 watts (W) was more effective at inactivating SARS-CoV-2 in the air over a
period of 10 seconds compared to 25 W 8.

Two simulation studies in a college and university setting suggest that SARS-CoV-2 infection risk
was lowest when upper-room UVGI technology was used in combination with other public
health measures 9, 10.

 In a classroom study, SARS-CoV-2 infection risk was lower when using general
ventilation and upper room UVGI technology (28%), compared to using general
ventilation and masking (35%) 10.
 The addition of UV-C ceiling fans (upper room UVGI technology) in every classroom
reduced the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infections, hospitalizations, and deaths more than
universal masking alone. A combination of masking and UV-C ceiling fans shows the
greatest reduction in risk 9.

PHAC EMERGING SCIENCE SUMMARIES 3

COVID-19 Summary of UVGI technologies in reducing SARS-CoV-2 March 18, 2022

Portable UV air cleaners were effective in reducing SARS-CoV-2 from the air of occupied rooms.
 The use of a portable UV air cleaner can effectively filter up to 82% of airborne droplets
with SARS-CoV-2 in a patient room 11.

Safety

Two studies reported on the safety of using UV-C lamps for inactivating SARS-CoV-2 in rooms
with people present. The main safety concerns are about exposure to UV wavelengths >230nm
that can penetrate the skin and eye tissue resulting in damage. Exposure prevention through
proper UVGI system design and professional maintenance is recommended. Other safety
concerns about ozone by-products or volatile organic compounds were not measured or
discussed in the identified literature.

 A field investigation from Russia reported that upper room UVGI low-pressure mercury
lamps (254 nm, 30 W) used 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, in occupied hospital rooms
were safe, as no overexposure cases were reported 6.
 One simulation study examined the impact of different room design parameters on the
safety of using an upper room UVGI lamp for SARS-CoV-2 inactivation:
o A rectangular room with one UVGI lamp (25.47 W) mounted at a height of 2.29m
on the short wall, was the safest configuration due to the ideal distance between
the wall-mounted UVGI lamp and the opposite wall, resulting in less UV-C
radiation reflected to the occupied lower area of the room 12.
o The higher the UVGI lamp is located on the wall, the lower the risk of over-
exposure 12.
o In an L-shaped room, UVGI lamp use was most likely to lead to overexposure
when one upper zone UVGI lamp (25.6 W) was placed on both short walls of the
room, compared to on one long wall of the room 12.

Overview of the evidence

There were 9 studies that reported on the effectiveness and safety of UVGI technologies in
reducing SARS-CoV-2 in the air of occupied rooms included in this review. This includes
simulation studies (n=8) and a field investigation (n=1). Seven studies reported on effectiveness
and two reported on both safety and effectiveness. All studies were peer reviewed with the
exception of one pre-print study that had not undergone peer review.

The evidence from the observational study designs is at high risk of bias as they are subject to
missing information, selection bias, and confounding factors. Simulation experiments were
highly variable in their objectives and approaches. These studies aim to mimic a real world
scenario to explore options for different UVGI interventions. There was no attempt to assess the
validity of these studies. Their results should be interpreted with caution as they may not reflect

PHAC EMERGING SCIENCE SUMMARIES 4

COVID-19 Summary of UVGI technologies in reducing SARS-CoV-2 March 18, 2022

what would happen in a field setting. For this review, no formal risk of bias assessment was
conducted. Overall there was a low level of evidence and the outcomes of this review may
change with future research. Additional studies, analyses, and reporting of real-world evidence
are required to improve confidence in the outcomes of this review.

What is the effectiveness of UV-C lamps used for whole-room far UV-C to reduce SARS-
CoV-2 in the air of occupied rooms?
New UV-C technology produces consistent short UV-C at a narrow bandwidth range 207-222nm
which does not penetrate the outer surface of the skin or eye. Due to this unique attribute these
UV-C lamps may be projected into an occupied space. The far UV-C lamps are excimer lamps
made of krypton-chloride that emit 222nm or light-emitting diodes such as those made of
aluminum nitride that emit UV-C 210nm 13. One simulation study reported on the effectiveness
of whole room far UV-C to inactivate SARS-CoV-2 (Table 1).

 The use of a far UV-C lamp (207-222 nm) located in the upper corner of a 3x3 meter air
conditioned room projecting down into the room occupied by a single person was
simulated 5. When the far UV-C lamp was used with high ventilation, the SARS-CoV-2
viral count was reduced by 90% in 6 minutes and 99% in 11.5 minutes 5. This viral count
reduction was performed in less than half the time it took for high ventilation of 8.0 air
changes per hour (ACH) alone to reduce viral count 5.

What is the effectiveness of UV-C lamps used for upper-room UVGI to reduce SARS-CoV-2
in the air of occupied rooms?
Seven studies assessed the effectiveness of UV-C lamps to reduce SARS-CoV-2 in the air of
rooms with people present. This included simulation studies (n=6), and a field investigation
(n=1). High level points are listed below, and details on individual studies can be found in Table
2.

 While community acquired COVID-19 cases were reported among staff in a hospital in
Russia from April to June 2020, there was no SARS-CoV-2 transmission reported among
TB and HIV patients located in hospital rooms with wall-mounted upper UVGI fixtures
(low-pressure mercury lamps, 254nm) 6.
 Four simulation studies on upper-room UVGI (254nm) 7, 8, 12, 14 suggest that this
application is effective in reducing SARS-CoV-2.
o A simulation of the use of upper-room UVGI (254nm) in three room
configurations effectively disinfected SARS-CoV-2 (fluence rate less than 48
µW/cm2). The ceiling height/UVGI mounting device height (C/M heights) of
2.44m/2.13m was most effective at SARS-CoV-2 upper zone disinfection (average
fluence rate = 56.56 µW/cm2), while all other C/M heights had an average fluence
rate of less than 48 µW/cm2, which is the threshold for average fluence rate 12.

PHAC EMERGING SCIENCE SUMMARIES 5

COVID-19 Summary of UVGI technologies in reducing SARS-CoV-2 March 18, 2022

o Another upper room UVGI study suggested when the UV-C susceptibility
constant for SARS-CoV-2 is 0.377 m2/J and ventilation is 8 ACH, the average
irradiation needed for 50%, 70%, and 90% SARS-CoV-2 inactivation is 2.6
µW/cm2, 4.4 µW/cm2, and 8.5 µW/cm2, respectively. Even in the worst-case
scenario (0.0377 m2/J), SARS-CoV-2 disinfection rates >90% can effectively occur
in a 2.5m high room with ventilation rates between 1-6 ACH, and one UV-C lamp
(30 W) located every 18.58 m2 (average fluence rate = 50 µW/cm2) 7.
o A dose response relationship was shown in a third simulation where a UV-C lamp
(254nm) with a power of 55 watts (W) was more effective at inactivating SARS-
CoV-2 in the air over a period of 10 seconds compared to 25 W 8.

o Increasing the number of UV beams and the separation between the angles of
UV beams hitting the virus particle resulted in reduced SARS-CoV-2 survival
fraction in a simulation study 14.

Two simulation studies in a college and university setting suggest that SARS-CoV-2 infection risk
was lowest when upper-room UVGI technology was used in combination with other public
health measures 9, 10.

 A simulation of a college with ~11,000 students and faculty suggests that the addition of
UV-C ceiling fans in every classroom reduces the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infections,
hospitalizations, and deaths more than no intervention and universal masking alone. A
combination of masking and UV-C ceiling fans show the greatest reduction in SARS-
CoV-2 infection risk 9.
 A simulation study in a university setting suggests that SARS-CoV-2 infection risk was
lowest when upper room UVGI technology was used with general ventilation (increased
air changes per hour), masking, and HEPA filtration 10. In a classroom, SARS-CoV-2
infection risk was lower when using general ventilation and upper room UVGI technology
(28%), compared to using general ventilation and masking (35%) 10.

What is the effectiveness of portable UV air cleaners to reduce SARS-CoV-2 in the air of
occupied rooms?
One simulation study reported on the effectiveness of portable UV air cleaners in inactivating
SARS-CoV-2 in the air of rooms with people present (Table 3).

 The use of a portable UV air cleaner can effectively filter up to 82% of airborne droplets
with SARS-CoV-2 in a patient room 11. Increasing the flow rate of the UV air cleaner may
improve SARS-CoV-2 filtration efficiency, however, there may be a risk of wider
distribution of SARS-CoV-2 in the room 11.

PHAC EMERGING SCIENCE SUMMARIES 6

COVID-19 Summary of UVGI technologies in reducing SARS-CoV-2 March 18, 2022

What is the safety of UVGI technologies to inactivate SARS-CoV-2 in the air of occupied
rooms?
Two studies reported on the safety of using UV-C lamps for inactivating SARS-CoV-2 in rooms
with people present. This included a field investigation and a simulation study. High level points
are listed below and details on individual studies can be found in Table 4.

 A field investigation from Russia reported that upper room UVGI low-pressure mercury
lamps (254 nm, 30 W) used 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, in occupied hospital rooms
were safe 6. No overexposure cases were reported in 17 years of use to disinfect
tuberculosis and at the beginning of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic 6.
 One simulation study examined the impact of different room design parameters on the
safety of using an upper room UVGI lamp for SARS-CoV-2 inactivation:
o A rectangular room shape (dimensions=4.57m x 3.44m x 2.74m) with one UVGI
lamp (254 nm, 25.47 W) mounted at a height of 2.29m on the short wall of the
room, was the safest configuration due to the ideal distance between the wall-
mounted UVGI lamp and the opposite wall 12. This resulted in less UV-C radiation
reflected from the wall to the occupied lower area of the room 12.
o The higher the UVGI lamp is located on the wall, the lower the risk of over-
exposure. If the ceiling height is 2.74 m, a UVGI lamp mounting height of 2.29 m
results in a reduced level of UV-C radiation reflected into the lower zone of the
room, compared to a mounting height of 2.13m 12.
o In an L-shaped hospital room (7.32m x 4.57m x 2.74m), UVGI lamp use was most
likely to lead to overexposure when one upper zone UVGI lamp (25.6 W, 254 nm)
was placed on both short walls of the room 12. When both UVGI lamps were
located on one long wall of the room, it resulted in the lowest risk of
overexposure 12.

Methods
A daily scan of the literature (published and pre-published) is conducted by the Emerging
Science Group, PHAC. The scan has compiled COVID-19 literature since the beginning of the
outbreak and is updated daily. Searches to retrieve relevant COVID-19 literature are conducted
in Pubmed, Scopus, BioRxiv, MedRxiv, ArXiv, SSRN, Research Square and cross-referenced with
the COVID-19 information centers run by Lancet, BMJ, Elsevier, Nature and Wiley. The daily
summary and full scan results are maintained in a refworks database and an excel list that can
be searched. Targeted keyword searching was conducted within these databases to identify
relevant citations on COVID-19 and SARS-COV-2. Search terms used included: UVGI, ultraviolet
germicidal irradiation, upper room, far UV, near UV, far ultraviolet, near ultraviolet, portable air
clean*, UV robot, ultraviolet robot, UV-C, UVC, UV disinfect*, UV-C disinfect*, UVC disinfect*, and
UVX. This review contains research published up to March 18, 2022. Each potentially relevant

PHAC EMERGING SCIENCE SUMMARIES 7

COVID-19 Summary of UVGI technologies in reducing SARS-CoV-2 March 18, 2022

reference was examined to confirm it had relevant data and relevant data was extracted into the
review.

Acknowledgements
Prepared by: Tricia Corrin, Tharani Raveendran, Melanie Katz, National Microbiology Laboratory,
Emerging Science Group, Public Health Agency of Canada.

Editorial review, science to policy review, peer-review by a subject matter expert and knowledge
mobilization of this document was coordinated by the Office of the Chief Science Officer:
ocsoevidence-bcscdonneesprobantes@phac-aspc.gc.ca

Evidence tables
Table 1: Evidence on the effectiveness of UV-C lamps for whole-room far UV-C in
inactivating SARS-CoV-2 in the air of occupied rooms (n=1)
Study Method Key outcomes

Simulation study (n=1)

Buchan (2020) Researchers simulated the use of a far
5
UV-C lamp (new technology that
emits a narrow bandwidth of 207-222
Simulation study nm, which are safe for humans)
located in the upper corner of a 3
UK meter by 3 meter air conditioned
room projecting down into the room
Nov 2020 (whole room UVGI), occupied by a
single person. There were two vents
located in the upper corners of the
room, and tests were conducted at
two different velocities (0.1 ms-1 / 8.0
air changes per hour (ACH) and 0.01
ms-1
/ 0.8 ACH). This was to determine
the efficacy of far UV-C in inactivating
SARS-CoV-2 when different velocities
of ventilation were used alone, or in
combination with far UV-C.
To represent far UV-C inactivation
values of SARS-CoV-2, the inactivation
value of other human coronaviruses
was used. The viral load of SARS-CoV-
2 was released into the room using
 When the far UV-C lamp was used
with high ventilation, the SARS-CoV-
2 viral count was reduced by 90% in
six minutes and 99% in 11.5 minutes.
This viral count reduction was
performed in less than half the time
it took for high ventilation of 8.0 ACH
alone to reduce viral count.
 The use of a far UV-C lamp in
combination with ACH ventilation at
0.8 and 8.0 velocities resulted in
quicker SARS-CoV-2 inactivation at
all distances, compared to using 0.8
or 8.0 ACH ventilation alone.
 When the viral load of SARS-CoV-2
was released using two second pulses
and two second pauses to represent
breathing, the use of the far UV-C
lamp in combination with 0.8 or 8.0
ACH ventilation, resulted in a ~20%
or 57% further reduction in viral
concentration, respectively,
compared to 0.8 or 8.0 ACH
ventilation used alone.

PHAC EMERGING SCIENCE SUMMARIES 8

COVID-19 Summary of UVGI technologies in reducing SARS-CoV-2 March 18, 2022

Study Method Key outcomes

two second pulses and two second

pauses to represent breathing.

Table 2: Evidence on the effectiveness of UV-C lamps used for upper-room UVGI in
inactivating SARS-CoV-2 in the air of occupied rooms (n=7)
Study Method Key outcomes

Field investigation (n=1)

Volchenkov (2021) Researchers examined the  There was no SARS-CoV-2
6
effectiveness and safety of upper and transmission reported among TB and
whole room UVGI in reducing SARS- HIV patients located in hospital
Field investigation CoV-2 and TB transmission among rooms with the UV-C fixtures, while
employees and patients within a community acquired COVID-19 cases
Russia hospital building. were reported among staff from
April-June 2020.
2003-2020 The UVGI source consisted of 240  Safety results found in Table 5.
wall-mounted UV-C fixtures (one
fixture per 18 m2). Each UV-C fixture
contained two low-pressure mercury
lamps (T8 30W, wavelength = 254 nm)
for upper and whole-room UVGI,
respectively.

The upper-room UVGI lamp was used

24 hours per day, 7 days per week,
when people were present and absent
from the hospital rooms, while the
whole-room UVGI lamp was only used
when people were not present in the
room.
Simulation studies (n=6)
Li (2021) 10 This study aimed to evaluate the For the scenarios in a classroom, gym,
SARS-CoV-2 infection risk in different library, and dining hall:
Simulation study indoor locations at a university, and  The average SARS-CoV-2 infection
the efficacy of engineering control risk was lower when UVGI was used in
China measures (including upper room addition to masking and general
UVGI) in different exposure scenarios. ventilation, compared to only
Jul 2021 The Wells-Riley equation was used to masking and general ventilation.
model SARS-CoV-2 infection risk. The
model assumed that the inactivation

PHAC EMERGING SCIENCE SUMMARIES 9

COVID-19 Summary of UVGI technologies in reducing SARS-CoV-2
Study Method
rate for upper room UVGI was 12± 1.3  The infection risk was approximately
h-1 (based on prior research using
mycobacteria). Wavelength and power
of the UVGI was not specified.
General ventilation looked at
increasing air change rates from 0.5 to
4 per hour. Masks included a range of
risk reduction estimates from surgical, For the scenario in a classroom:
dental, homemade and N95s.
The five exposure scenarios included:
sleeping or talking in a dormitory,
studying or talking in a classroom,
playing basketball in a gym, studying
or whispering in a library, and eating
in a dining hall.
Hill (2021)14 This study aimed to examine the
optimization of a UVGI disinfection
Simulation study system on the survival fraction of
SARS-CoV-2 virions that are within
USA host particles (shielding them from
UVGI) in the air or on surfaces.
Jul 2021
For the purposes of this review, only
the upper room UGVI applications
were considered.
In the simulations, virions in a group
of particles were exposed to UV light
and the average survival fraction of
the virions was calculated under
varying conditions regarding the
number of light beams and the
distance between the angles of light.
UV wavelengths of 260 nm and 302
nm were studied.
Swanson (2021) 9 This simulation characterized the
preprint probabilities of SARS-CoV-2 infection,
hospitalization, and death associated
Simulation study with aerosol exposure from in-person
classes and the impacts of masking
PHAC EMERGING SCIENCE SUMMARIES
March 18, 2022
Key outcomes
the same when general ventilation
was used with HEPA vs. with UVGI.
 The lowest infection risk was found
when a combination of general
ventilation, masking, UVGI, and HEPA
was used.
 The SARS-CoV-2 infection risk was
35% with general ventilation and
masking vs. 28% with general
ventilation and UVGI (exposure time
was 24 hours).
 Note: The model did not take into
account the type of UVGI technology
or its installation location.
 When exposed to UVGI, the survival
fraction of SARS-CoV-2 virions in
host particles increased as the
particle size increased.
 Increasing the number of UV light
beams hitting the particle resulted in
a lower virion survival fraction, even
though the total UV energy emitted
remained the same.
 Increasing the separation between
the angles of UV light beams hitting
the particle resulted in a lower virion
survival fraction (compared to light
beams coming from a similar
direction).
 Upper room UV-C ceiling fans in
every classroom reduces the risk of
infection (>40%) more than universal
masking alone.
10
COVID-19 Summary of UVGI technologies in reducing SARS-CoV-2
Study Method
USA and UV-C ceiling fans. The UV-C
ceiling fans have disinfecting
Apr-May 2021 ultraviolet lights built into the base of
the fan that are aimed up at the
ceiling, thus an upper room UVGI
application.
A semester of courses in a real college
with approximately 11,000 students
embedded within a larger university
was modelled. The schedule input for
the model included 11,968 students
and 342 faculty in 1,025 courses.
Immunity rates from 60-95% were
used in the simulation to determine
the impacts of masking and UV-C fan
ceiling interventions.
D’Alessandro (2021) An Eulerian–Lagrangian model was
8
developed to examine the effect of
UV-C irradiation on inactivation of
Simulation study airborne virus/bacteria particles in a
PHAC EMERGING SCIENCE SUMMARIES
March 18, 2022
Key outcomes
 Compared to no intervention, a
combination of masking and UV-C
fans show the greatest reduction
SARS-CoV-2 infection risk.
 Under a low SARS-CoV-2
transmissibility scenario with 60%
immunity and using UV-C ceiling
fans, the probability of exceeding 50,
100, 250, and 500 student infections
was >0.999, 0.997, <0.001, and
<0.001 respectively. The probability
of exceeding 1, 2, 10, and 20 faculty
infections was 0.936, 0.156, 0.002, and
<0.001, respectively. At 90%
immunity probabilities drop to
<0.001 for the above thresholds in
students and staff.
 Under a high SARS-CoV-2
transmissibility scenario with 60%
immunity and using UV-C ceiling
fans, the probably of exceeding 50,
100, 250, and 500 student and 1, 2,
10, and 20 faculty infections was
>0.999, and at 90% immunity was
0.814, 0.034, <0.001, and <0.001 for
students and 0.652, 0.008, 0.002, and
<0.001 for staff, respectively. Adding
masking decreased the probability of
exceeding 500 student and 20 faculty
infections at 60% immunity to 0.554
and 0.005, respectively.
 Scenarios for 70%, 80%, and 95%
immunity were also provided.
 Similar trends were shown for
hospitalizations and death.
 UV-C irradiation was shown to
effectively inactivate the majority of
SARS-CoV-2 particles in a cloud of
saliva droplets after 4 seconds.
11
COVID-19 Summary of UVGI technologies in reducing SARS-CoV-2
Study Method
cloud of saliva droplets. Clouds
Italy produced from one, two, and three
cough ejections were modelled. The
Mar 2021 UV-C source was a lamp at a
wavelength of 254 nm, with a power
of 25 watts (W) or 55 W.
In the model, the radiation dose
sufficient to inactivate SARS-CoV-2
was used as the “susceptibility
constant” for the virus/bacteria
(8.5281 x 10-2 m2/J).
Hou (2021) Researchers used ray-tracing to
12
simulate the impact of different room
design parameters on the safety and
Simulation study effectiveness of UV-C irradiation of
SARS-CoV-2. The simulation involved
USA the use of an occupied test room (24 x
30 feet, floor area = 15.80 m2), which
Mar 2021 had one wall-mounted UVGI lamp
(254 nm, 25.47 W).
Three room configurations were
examined: configuration 1 (square,
3.97m length x 3.97m width, UVGI
lamp located on one wall),
configuration 2 (rectangle, 4.57 m x
3.44m, UVGI lamp located on long
wall), configuration 3 (rectangle,
4.57m x 3.44m, UVGI lamp located on
short wall). Four ceiling height / UVGI
device mounting heights (C/M height)
were examined: C/M height 1 (2.44m /
2.13m), C/M height 2 (2.74m / 2.13m),
C/M height 3 (2.74m / 2.29m), and
C/M height 4 (3.05m / 2.44m).
A simulated case study involving an
occupied hospital room (7.32m length
x 4.57m width, default ceiling height =
2.74 m, floor area = 27.87 m2) with
PHAC EMERGING SCIENCE SUMMARIES
March 18, 2022
Key outcomes
 The UV-C lamp with a power of 55 W
was more effective at inactivating
SARS-CoV-2 over a period of 10
seconds compared to 25 W.
 Note: visualizations were provided in
the study that show SARS-CoV-2
inactivation in a cloud of droplets
produced from one, two, and three
cough ejections.
Simulation study:
 Configuration 3 resulted in the
highest SARS-CoV-2 disinfection
effectiveness of all three room
configurations (average fluence rate
= 41.94 µW/cm2). However, all three
room configurations resulted in the
effective deactivation of SARS-CoV-2
within 19 seconds, at a fluence rate
less than 48 µW/cm2.
 C/M height 1 has the most effective
SARS-CoV-2 upper zone disinfection
effectiveness (average fluence rate =
56.56 µW/cm2), while all other C/M
heights had an average fluence rate
of less than 48 µW/cm2, which is the
threshold for average fluence rate.
 Accounting for both SARS-CoV-2
disinfection effectiveness and safety,
C/M height 3 is the optimal option.
Case simulation study:
 Scenarios 1 and 4 had the most
effective SARS-CoV-2 upper zone
disinfection coverages of 18.85%
(average upper zone fluence rate =
48.19 µW/cm2) and 14.83% (average
upper zone fluence rate = 48.61
µW/cm2), respectively.
12
COVID-19 Summary of UVGI technologies in reducing SARS-CoV-2 March 18, 2022

Study Method Key outcomes

two upper zone UVGI lamps (Atlantic  All three room layouts resulted in
Ultraviolet Corporation Hygeaire effective SARS-CoV-2 disinfection
model LIND24-EVO, lamp power = (maximum irradiance at the 1.83m to
25.6 W each, 254 nm) was also 1.98m range: layout 1 = 0.31 µW/cm2
performed to determine the impact of for a maximum of 5.2 hours; layout 2
different room design parameters on = 0.28 µW/cm2 for a maximum of 5.7
the safety and effectiveness of UV-C hours; layout 3 = 0.33 µW/cm2 for a
irradiation of SARS-CoV-2. maximum of 4.9 hours).
 Safety results found in Table 5.
Four scenarios for UVGI fixture
location were examined: scenario 1
(UVGI fixtures located above the bed),
scenario 2 (UVGI fixtures located
opposite of the bed), scenario 3 (UVGI
fixtures located on the left and right
side walls from the bed), and scenario
4 (UVGI fixtures located above and
beside the bed). Three patient room
layouts were examined: layout 1 (L-
shaped, 7.32m length x 4.57m width,
default), layout 2 (rectangular, 6.01m x
4.57m), layout 3 (rectangular, 7.01m x
3.96m). Three room surface UV-C
reflectance coefficients were examined
(0.05 (default), 0.1, and 0.2). Three
scenarios for ceiling height / UVGI
fixture mounting height were
examined: height 1 (2.74 m / 2.13m),
height 2 (2.74m / 2.29m; default), and
height 3 (3.05 m / 2.44m).

SARS-CoV-2 disinfection effectiveness

was measured using average fluence
rate (µW/cm2).

PHAC EMERGING SCIENCE SUMMARIES 13

COVID-19 Summary of UVGI technologies in reducing SARS-CoV-2
Study Method
Beggs (2020) In this study, researchers simulated
7
the best and worst case scenarios for
using upper-room UVGI (~254 nm) to
Simulation study determine its efficacy in decreasing
SARS-CoV-2 transmission in occupied
UK buildings.
Oct 2020 The upper room UV-C susceptibility
constant for SARS-CoV-2 was
assumed to be 0.377 m2/J (best case)
and 0.0377 m2/J (worst case), and the
amount of UV irradiation (UV flux)
required to inactivate 50%, 70%, and
90% of the SARS-CoV-2 virus in a 1 to
8 ACH ventilated room (dimensions =
4.2m x 4.2m x 2.5m) with an upper
room UVGI lamp (height = 2.1m
above floor) was determined. The UV-
C lamp (30 W) used was assumed to
have an average upper-room flux of
50 µW/cm2.
Table 3: Evidence on the effectiveness of portable UV air cleaners in inactivating SARS-
CoV-2 in the air of occupied rooms (n=1)
Study Method
Simulation study (n=1)
Feng (2020) 11 This study aimed to evaluate the
effectiveness of a novel portable UV
Simulation study air cleaner in reducing airborne
droplets with SARS-CoV-2 in a
USA patient’s room (4.8m length x 4.3m
PHAC EMERGING SCIENCE SUMMARIES
March 18, 2022
Key outcomes
 Best-case scenario: When the UV-C
susceptibility constant for SARS-CoV-
2 is 0.377 m2/J, at the highest
ventilation rate of 8 ACH, the
average irradiation needed for 50%,
70%, and 90% SARS-CoV-2
inactivation is 2.6 µW/cm2, 4.4
µW/cm2, and 8.5 µW/cm2,
respectively.
 Worst-case scenario: When the UV-C
susceptibility constant for SARS-CoV-
2 is 0.0377 m2/J, at the highest
ventilation rate of 8 ACH, the
average irradiance needed for 50%,
70%, and 90% SARS-CoV-2
inactivation is 25.5 µW/cm2, 44.4
µW/cm2, and 84.8 µW/cm2,
respectively, which is a ~10 factor
increase compared to the best-case
scenario.
 Even in the worst-case scenario
(0.0377 m2/J), SARS-CoV-2
disinfection rates >90% can
effectively occur in a 2.5m high room
with ventilation rates between one to
six ACH, and one UV lamp (30 W)
located every 18.58 m2. This will
result in an average UV flux of 50
µW/cm2.
Key outcomes
 A portable UV air cleaner could filter
up to 82% of airborne droplets with
SARS-CoV-2.
 Increasing the flow rate of the UV air
cleaner could improve its efficiency in
14
COVID-19 Summary of UVGI technologies in reducing SARS-CoV-2
Study Method
width x 2.4m height). Simulations were
Jan 2021 conducted using a computational
fluid-particle dynamics model. In
these simulations, a patient emitted
droplets with SARS-CoV-2, and the
effectiveness of the portable UV air
cleaner was assessed under different
flow rates and ventilation conditions.
Wavelength and power of the UV air
cleaner was not specified.
Effectiveness was measured by the
reduction in concentration of droplets
with SARS-CoV-2 suspended in the
room and in the main ventilation
system.
Table 4: Evidence on the safety of UV-C technologies in inactivating SARS-CoV-2 in the air
of occupied rooms (n=2)
Study Method
Field investigation (n=1)
Volchenkov (2021) Researchers examined the
6
effectiveness and safety of upper and
whole room UVGI in reducing COVID-
Field investigation 19 and TB transmission among
employees and patients within a
Russia hospital building.
2003-2020 The UVGI source consisted of 240
wall-mounted UV-C fixtures (one
fixture per 18 m2). Each UV-C fixture
contained two low-pressure mercury
lamps (T8 30W, wavelength = 254 nm)
for upper and whole-room UVGI,
respectively.
The upper-room UVGI lamp was used
24 hours per day, 7 days per week,
when people were present and absent
PHAC EMERGING SCIENCE SUMMARIES
March 18, 2022
Key outcomes
filtering droplets with SARS-CoV-2,
which meant a higher number of
droplets filtered in a unit time.
 However, increasing the flow rate
could also increase convection and
airflow recirculation in the room,
resulting in a wider distribution of
airborne droplets with SARS-CoV-2 in
the room.
 Note: Simulated visualizations are
provided, which show the SARS-CoV-
2 droplet deposition patterns in the
room under different UV air cleaner
flow rates and ventilation conditions.
Key outcomes
 In 17 years of using the UV-C fixtures
in the hospital, no cases of
overexposure have been reported
due to upper-room UVGI, while
some cases of overexposure were
reported due to whole-room UVGI
(people were not supposed to be
present).
 Effectiveness results found in Table 1.
15
COVID-19 Summary of UVGI technologies in reducing SARS-CoV-2
Study Method
from the hospital rooms, while the
whole-room UVGI lamp was only used
when people were not present in the
room for sterilization purposes.
Simulation study (n=1)
Hou (2021) Researchers used ray-tracing to
12
simulate the impact of different room
design parameters on the safety and
Simulation study effectiveness of UV-C irradiation of
SARS-CoV-2. The simulation involved
USA the use of an occupied test room (24 x
30 feet, floor area = 15.80 m2), which
Mar 2021 had one wall-mounted UVGI lamp
(254 nm, 25.47 W).
Three room configurations were
examined: configuration 1 (square,
3.97m length x 3.97m width, UVGI
lamp located on one wall),
configuration 2 (rectangle, 4.57m x
3.44m, UVGI lamp located on long
wall), configuration 3 (rectangle,
4.57m x 3.44m, UVGI lamp located on
short wall). Four ceiling height / UVGI
device mounting heights (C/M height)
were examined: C/M height 1 (2.44m /
2.13m), C/M height 2 (2.74m / 2.13m),
C/M height 3 (2.74m / 2.29m), and
C/M height 4 (3.05m / 2.44m).
A simulated case study involving an
occupied hospital room (7.32m length
x 4.57m width, default ceiling height =
2.74 m, floor area = 27.87 m2) with
two upper zone UVGI lamps (Atlantic
PHAC EMERGING SCIENCE SUMMARIES
March 18, 2022
Key outcomes
Simulation study:
 Configuration 3 is the safest room
configuration for individuals
occupying the lower zone, as it has
the optimal distance between the
UVGI device and the opposite wall,
which allows less UV light to be
reflected off the wall and onto those
occupying the lower zone.
 C/M height 4 is the safest option
with the lowest likelihood of UV
overexposure to occupants in the
room, because it has the largest
difference between the ceiling and
the UVGI device mounting height,
causing lower amounts of UV light to
be reflected from the ceiling to the
lower zone.
 Accounting for both SARS-CoV-2
disinfection effectiveness and safety,
C/M height 3 is the optimal option.
Case simulation:
 The highest risk of UV-C
overexposure for humans was in
Scenario 3, while Scenario 1 had the
lowest risk of UV-C overexposure.
 As the UVGI fixture mounting height
increased, there was a decrease in
room areas with UV-C irradiance
16
COVID-19 Summary of UVGI technologies in reducing SARS-CoV-2
Study Method
Ultraviolet Corporation Hygeaire
model LIND24-EVO, lamp power =
25.6 W each, 254 nm) was also
performed to determine the impact of
different room design parameters on
the safety and effectiveness of UV-C
irradiation of SARS-CoV-2.
Four scenarios for UVGI fixture
location were examined: scenario 1
(UVGI fixtures located above the bed),
scenario 2 (UVGI fixtures located
opposite of the bed), scenario 3 (UVGI
fixtures located on the left and right
side walls from the bed), and scenario
4 (UVGI fixtures located above and
beside the bed). Three patient room
layouts were examined: layout 1 (L-
shaped, 7.32m length x 4.57m width,
default), layout 2 (rectangular, 6.01m x
4.57m), layout 3 (rectangular, 7.01m x
3.96m). Three room surface UV-C
reflectance coefficients were examined
(0.05 (default), 0.1, and 0.2). Three
scenarios for ceiling height / UVGI
fixture mounting height were
examined: height 1 (2.74 m / 2.13m),
height 2 (2.74m / 2.29m; default), and
height 3 (3.05 m / 2.44m).
SARS-CoV-2 disinfection effectiveness
was measured using average fluence
rate (µW/cm2).
PHAC EMERGING SCIENCE SUMMARIES
March 18, 2022
Key outcomes
above the safety threshold (0.2
µW/cm2).
 Height 2 had a reduced level of
lower zone UV-C irradiance
compared to Height 1, indicating
that the higher the UVGI lamp is
located on the wall, the lower the risk
of over-exposure.
 Increasing the surface reflectance
coefficients from 0.05 (default) to 0.1
and 0.2, increased the upper zone
average fluence rate, and caused
lower zone UV-C irradiance greater
than the safety threshold (0.2
µW/cm2), when the wall height was
below 1.83 m. The greatest lower
zone UV-C irradiance was observed
at a reflectance coefficient of 0.2.
 Effectiveness results found in Table 1.
17
COVID-19 Summary of UVGI technologies in reducing SARS-CoV-2 March 18, 2022

References
1. Sellera FP, Sabino CP, Cabral FV, et al. PMC8444477; A systematic scoping review of ultraviolet C (UVC)
light systems for SARS-CoV-2 inactivation. J Photochem Photobiol. 2021 Dec;8:100068.
DOI:10.1016/j.jpap.2021.100068.

2. Memarzadeh F. A review of recent evidence for utilizing ultraviolet irradiation technology to disinfect
both indoor air and surfaces. Applied Biosafety. 2021;26(1):52-6. DOI:10.1089/apb.20.0056.

3. Leung KCP, Ko TCS. Improper use of germicidal range ultraviolet lamp for household disinfection
leading to phototoxicity in COVID-19 suspects. Cornea. 2020 Apr 29 DOI:10.1097/ico.0000000000002397.

4. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Upper-Room Ultraviolet Germicidal Irradiation (UVGI). Page
Update Date: 2021.Accessed:03/25 .URL: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-
ncov/community/ventilation/UVGI.html

5. Buchan AG, Yang L, Atkinson KD. Predicting airborne coronavirus inactivation by far-UVC in populated
rooms using a high-fidelity coupled radiation-CFD model. Sci Rep. 2020 Nov 12;10:19659.
DOI:10.1038/s41598-020-76597-y.

6. Volchenkov G. Experience with UV-C air disinfection in some russian hospitals†. Photochem Photobiol.
2021 DOI:10.1111/php.13418.

7. Beggs CB, Avital EJ. Upper-room ultraviolet air disinfection might help to reduce COVID-19 transmission
in buildings: A feasibility study. PeerJ. 2020;8 DOI:10.7717/peerj.10196.

8. D'Alessandro V, Falone M, Giammichele L. Eulerian-lagrangian modelling of bio-aerosols irradiated by

UV-C light in relation to SARS-CoV-2 transmission. arXiv. 2020

9. Swanson T, Guikema SD, Bagian J, et al. COVID-19 aerosol transmission simulation-based risk analysis
for in-person learning. medRxiv. 2021:2021.10.04.21263860. DOI:10.1101/2021.10.04.21263860.

10. Li J, Cheng Z, Zhang Y, et al. Evaluation of infection risk for SARS-CoV-2 transmission on university
campuses. Science and Technology for the Built Environment. 2021 DOI:10.1080/23744731.2021.1948762.

11. Feng Y, Zhao J, Spinolo M, et al. Assessing the filtration effectiveness of a portable ultraviolet air
cleaner on airborne sars-cov-2 laden droplets in a patient room: A numerical study. Aerosol and Air
Quality Research. 2021;21(5) DOI:10.4209/aaqr.200608.

12. Hou M, Pantelic J, Aviv D. Spatial analysis of the impact of UVGI technology in occupied rooms using
ray-tracing simulation. Indoor Air. 2021 Mar 26 DOI:10.1111/ina.12827.

13. Taniyasu Y, Kasu M, Makimoto T. An aluminium nitride light-emitting diode with a wavelength of
210 nanometres. Nature. 2006;441:325–328.

14. Hill SC, Mackowski DW, Doughty DC. Shielding of viruses such as SARS-cov-2 from ultraviolet
radiation in particles generated by sneezing or coughing: Numerical simulations of survival fractions. J
Occup Environ Hyg. 2021 Jun 23:1-18. DOI:10.1080/15459624.2021.1939877.

PHAC EMERGING SCIENCE SUMMARIES 18